Carter v. Carter Coal Co.
E28480
Carter v. Carter Coal Co. was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down federal regulation of coal production as an unconstitutional overreach of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers.
All labels observed (3)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Carter v. Carter Coal Co. canonical | 7 |
| Carter v. Carter Coal Co. (1936) | 1 |
| Carter v. Carter Coal Company | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T221581 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Carter v. Carter Coal Co. Context triple: [Bituminous Coal Conservation Act of 1935, challengedInCase, Carter v. Carter Coal Co.]
-
A.
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
-
B.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
C.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
D.
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. is a landmark 1937 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld federal power to regulate labor relations, marking a major expansion of Congress’s authority over interstate commerce.
-
E.
Corfield v. Coryell
Corfield v. Coryell is an 1823 federal circuit court decision by Justice Bushrod Washington that famously articulated an influential early list of the fundamental rights protected by the U.S. Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Carter v. Carter Coal Co. Target entity description: Carter v. Carter Coal Co. was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down federal regulation of coal production as an unconstitutional overreach of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers.
-
A.
United States v. Darby
United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
-
B.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
C.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
D.
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. is a landmark 1937 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld federal power to regulate labor relations, marking a major expansion of Congress’s authority over interstate commerce.
-
E.
Corfield v. Coryell
Corfield v. Coryell is an 1823 federal circuit court decision by Justice Bushrod Washington that famously articulated an influential early list of the fundamental rights protected by the U.S. Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities Clause.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Commerce Clause case
ⓘ
New Deal era case ⓘ United States Supreme Court case ⓘ landmark case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
commerce power
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ federalism ⓘ labor regulation ⓘ |
| category |
United States Supreme Court cases of the Hughes Court
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court cases on the Commerce Clause ⓘ |
| citation | 298 U.S. 238 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Commerce Clause
ⓘ
Due Process Clause ⓘ
surface form:
Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1936-05-18 ⓘ |
| era |
Lochner v. New York
ⓘ
surface form:
Lochner era
pre–New Deal constitutional jurisprudence ⓘ |
| fullName |
Carter v. Carter Coal Co.
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Carter v. Carter Coal Company
|
| holding |
Congress may not regulate coal production under the Commerce Clause because production is a local activity, not interstate commerce
ⓘ
price-fixing and labor provisions of the Bituminous Coal Conservation Act exceeded Congress’s Commerce Clause power ⓘ Bituminous Coal Conservation Act of 1935 ⓘ
surface form:
the Bituminous Coal Conservation Act of 1935 was unconstitutional in relevant part
|
| impact |
reinforced judicial limits on federal power over local industrial activity
ⓘ
restricted New Deal economic regulation under the Commerce Clause ⓘ |
| keyDoctrine |
direct versus indirect effects on interstate commerce
ⓘ
limits on federal regulation of local production ⓘ production versus commerce distinction ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
distinction between production and commerce
ⓘ
federal regulation of coal production ⓘ nondelegation and delegation of legislative power ⓘ scope of the Commerce Clause ⓘ |
| locationOfOriginatingDispute | West Virginia ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Justice George Sutherland ⓘ |
| pageInUnitedStatesReports | 238 ⓘ |
| party |
Carter Coal Company
ⓘ
James W. Carter ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States
ⓘ
surface form:
A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States
Hammer v. Dagenhart ⓘ NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. ⓘ |
| result | Act held unconstitutional in part ⓘ |
| statuteInvolved | Bituminous Coal Conservation Act of 1935 ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
bituminous coal industry
ⓘ
collective bargaining in coal mining ⓘ wages and hours of coal miners ⓘ |
| subsequentDevelopment | narrow view of the Commerce Clause later rejected by the Supreme Court in New Deal and post–New Deal cases ⓘ |
| volumeOfUnitedStatesReports | 298 ⓘ |
| vote | 5-4 ⓘ |
| yearDecided | 1936 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Carter v. Carter Coal Co. Description of subject: Carter v. Carter Coal Co. was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down federal regulation of coal production as an unconstitutional overreach of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers.
Referenced by (9)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
this entity surface form:
Carter v. Carter Coal Company
this entity surface form:
Carter v. Carter Coal Co. (1936)